This news may have escaped the attention of many (I heard it on the BBC); yet, I did note it.

According to the authorities over there, he was a schizophrenic with a history. I do not know much about this medical condition, yet there is Doctor Szasz. MD who, I think, believes that all such categorisations are just the hallucinations of the Medical profession (www.szasz.com).

Whatever it is, there is a factor of language that I have noted that has escaped scientific attention. That is, in feudal languages, when persons get attached to unbearable language levels, it creates severe mental trauma, that breaks out in a most violent form.

Here, in the BBC News, the word Janitor was used. But, when it comes to a feudal language, the social sense it conveys may in most cases not be what one can image in English. The words change, and understandings change; and the level of human dignity is also different. Actually, this can be the case with a lot of other common words in English like governess, babysitter, nanny and so forth.

What happens is that in this case, when others in society introduces a man below his natural mental level of dignity, many others would take the hint and continue the scenario; this could be a horrible situation, not at all understandable in English. Each verbal communication, he receives becomes a sort of mental battering. In some cases, the man, if he has some level of dignity in him would react with extreme violence. And the trauma increases to unbearable levels when the other person is presumably below his natural level of social standing, even a child.

I do not know if what happened in China has anything to do with what I wrote. It is also possible that some other mental pressures, of which I do not know anything about, may have been at work. But, what I have said is also a living reality.

Actually in my book, I have dealt this topic in a most minor manner. The context was of a bureaucrat in a feudal language nation (I have given the language name and place here) being addressed by an ordinary citizen with words, which are polite, but lack feudal reverence. The reaction is discussed here.

QUOTE

Schizophrenia: Along with this comes his or her propensity for schizophrenia.——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————But in the feudal connotation, it ( the words used) lacks the proper level. Hence the outburst of the mental illness. The bureaucrat would immediately go furious, with no proper tangible reason; his eyes may become bloodshot; his voice may tremble; his physical features may also tremble; his words may lose proper grammar; his writing may all go wrong; he would lose his sense of proportion; sometimes he would refuse to look at the common man, who spoke to him, in the eye.

Actually, I do think that persons who exist on the borderline between a feudal set-up and the common people would be slightly vulnerable to mental tensions, which may sometimes have been diagnosed as pure mental imbalance.

In most nations, guns are not common among the people; so the reactions in most cases would be verbal, or with minor arms. But then again, in feudal language nations, generally people remain in their particular social level, with a catastrophic dismantling coming about only in very rare and unlucky cases.

But in nations where guns are commonly available, it could create massacres. For, example in an English nation, it can happen when persons get mentally traumatised by a feeling that there is a strange subordination going on in the communication and gestures, by persons who speak un-understandable languages. If this happens, then it can have disastrous affects, for guns are available.

In this context, I may again quote from my book (another area).

QUOTE

This hidden danger is there for all persons who see a professional from the feudal language nation. He is good in English, is very courteous, and very able. At times, an English native person may be persuaded to work in his house, as a domestic help, a baby sitter, or some other minor jobs. When he is around, fine! and if the other members of his family are also communicating to each other in English, then also fine; but if the other members of his family are communicating in their native tongues like ——————————————— etc. then it is another proposition altogether. For, once the native language program starts functioning, there would be a real virus working to disturb the English native.

The person may feel an intense sense of something binding him or her, and it would be felt in the looks, actions and postures of the elderly native language speaker. If the English person has no occasion to move away from this environment, some very violent reaction may be expected

. This disturbance is something that even the psychologists won’t fathom unless they understand what I am trying to convey.

It may be understood that the negatives affects are not a White verses Black, or an Englishman verses a non-Englishman phenomena, but an English language verses feudal language issue, and the colour of the persons involved has no meaning here.

The same affect can happen in many other nations, only thing is that generally in these nations communication levels move through socially accepted routes, so not much mental disturbances happen.

Posted on September 14, 2004

Quote: Oldfred

There is nothing demeaning or undignifies in being a manual-worker which is what a janitor, or caretaker as we mostly call them over here, is.

My answer:

Quote:ved.

the word Janitor was used. But, when it comes to a feudal language, the social sense it conveys may in most cases not be what one can image in English. The words change, and understandings change; and the level of human dignity is also different.

Quote: MadMarchHare

i dont get it, and i’m with oldfred on this - cobblers!

I do not want to be seen gloating, with an annoying smirk on my face, saying, oh I know something you do not know.

Actually, I seem to have arrived in provoking your understanding on what I was desperately trying to convey. Actually, I did give a fairly good hint of the theme, in ‘March of the Evil Empires: Alien languages & cultures. (Banter & Rant).

You see, it is not in the word ‘janitor’ that the problem exists. But in the package of other words, that come along with the social understanding of the word Janitor.

To give a minor illustration, I would say that there are several layers of respectability in feudal language communications. And each exists with a very distinct group of words. Consider these words: You, He, She, Him, His, Her etc. In English, these words do not change according to a person’s job/vocation/profession, social position, financial condition, physical prowess etc. But in feudal languages, they change to different package of words, exerting a singular level of social force; which in turn, affects the understanding of all persons who have to acknowledge it.

This is a very abominable thing that the English speakers have not experienced, other than the very minor level of feudal structuring that is in their communication with the monarchy, and aristocracy. In the feudal languages, this exists at all levels of the society, and between any two individuals. The lower levels of words do have very mean connotations. It really creates sharp mental moods, which in turn design the person’s facial expressions. And the cumulative affect is that it designs the whole social structure.

Quote: MadMarchHare

When i was a receptionist - I called myself that - even though some viewed this as a ‘lower’ job (through the way i was treated on the phone and in the reception) I couldnt have been called anything else!

It is not in the word receptionist itself, but in its connected words. But then, in English, even if anyone proposes that a receptionist is a minor person, he cant do anything more about it; but in the languages that I have in my mind, the other man comes with a very intimidating tool, the language. He simply would change the other words to lower forms, to which you have no defence. And the affect is pure mental and social subordination.

What I would like to bring to notice was the affect of such communication systems, on the English social scene. The affect would be pure disaster!

I would like to quote from my own post: What one could lose!

Quote:ved

Here my aim is not to say that the average Englishman is of a better ethical or moral standard than his counterpart elsewhere, but of the fact that the systems, that he carries in his mind, has a rare element of grace, and beauty. What is needed is that this should be allowed to spread to the rest of the world, and not the reverse to happen, wherein the Englishman starts reacting to alien cultural reactions, which come embedded in alien languages.

I am taking another quote from the same posting.

Quote:Sledgehead:

Far from being pure, English is corrupted almost every day so as to better serve its users. In this way it stays relevant. Recently words like schmoe (yiddish), latte (Italian) and pucka (Indian) have all been found to be useful adjuncts to English and have been absorbed

The word ‘pacca’, I think is Hindi, and there is a separate English called Hinglish (it is still in its infancy). When one thinks of only one word, the negativity that it has may not be discernable. But then, if many more words from the same language, find acceptance, then their mutual strings also, get embedded in English. This, to say the least, would be the death of English, and the birth of Hinglish.

Actually it is like a single person from an alien religion coming over there, and wearing a religious dress; one is fascinated by the variety it adds to one’s scenery. But, when a lot more of the same come there, and suddenly one finds that there is lot more to these dresses, in their implication, than just the concept of clothing, then it is another scenario, altogether.

Quote:tinkerbell

What happened? did any of the children die from the attack . What has happened to the janitor

I saw this news on BBC World a few days back. It seems that this man had attacked the small children with a knife and one child had immediately died.

Posted on Aug 18 2004,

My appologies to KahluaBlue and King Arthur. I wrote a reply for Oldred and MadMarchHare. Then I saw your reply. But let me clarify. I am not writing this to justify any criminal activity. But, was using this theme to debate a wider point.

Quote: Oldfred

As to schizophrenia (split-personality)....I’m in two minds about that.

I find it most interesting that you have mentioned the word ‘split-personality’. In my book, there is a sentence that comes very much near to it in literal meaning.

QUOTE

Actually, persons who think and function in feudal language software programs do have a sort of ambivalent and ambiguous two-sided personality, which are starkly different and distinct from each other. One of meek obsequiousness, when he or she is on the lower pane; and other of stifling regimentation. It need not be understood that the latter behaviour comes with loud and pretentious arrogance; for it can also be displayed more effectively with supreme finesse.

There is another quotation that I took from Robert Clive’s speech in the British House of Commons more than 200 years. I have already given it in another post of mine: Business Offshore Processing.

Let me quote from Robert Clive:

The inhabitants, especially of Bengal, in inferior stations, are servile, mean, submissive, and humble. In superior stations, they are luxurious, effeminate, tyrannical, treacherous, venal, cruel.

Could it be that ambivalence in personality is embedded in the language itself?

Quote: Oldfred:

So let me see if I’ve got this right Ved!

In English the word Janitor means just that....a caretaker type,

yet under your interpretation it means a demeaning job that can lead to some demented individual attacking a bunch of children.

No you have not got it right! I did not say is that the word ‘Janitor’ is demeaning, but that certain languages are ‘demented’.

Quote: Oldfred:

Maybe your messages wouldn’t cause so much confussion if they were written in plain English....then maybe, just maybe we would ‘know what you know’

Quote: MadMarchHare

Yeah ved, if you can put it in laymans terms, maybe you could help us

I admit that my writing style has some problems, like I tend to use a lot of adjectives, among others.

Quote: Sledgehead: in What one can lose

You’re sounding like a “damned foreigner”!

I am one!

Actually, you may find grammar errors in my book. This is despite the fact that I am not very bad in proofreading. One reason may be that I find it difficult to proofread my own writing. And another because of the fact that this book I have not given to anyone for proofreading. There is one more reason—————.

I also notice that you have not taken notice of a bureaucrat’s (in a feudal language nation) mental reaction to communications, which lack feudal reverence. This reaction is not just that of a bureaucrat’s. But actually would take place at various levels of the society, if one does not concede the feudal superiority of every layer that comes above.

Those who concede (actually most would) would seem to be very disciplined, docile, subordinated etc. even if he or she is a natural thief. And those who do not, would be understood as impertinent, undisciplined, unmanageable, unruly, rowdy etc. even if he or she is basically good, honest, disciplined, polite, and orderly.

This is a communication problem that is not experienced in pure English. But then, I know many types of English (of non-English nations), where all these features are fully encrypted, and used daily, with as much power as there is in the base vernacular language.

Now going back to the theme, there is a more sinister setting that can happen. A person who is superior in some sense is addressed with inferior words, by inferiors, or even by other persons of equal superiority. It can be a really abominable situation.